ReviewReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2026
Ten years of POSEIDON classification: a SOAR analysis.
Review in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntroduced in 2016, the POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing Individualized Oocyte Number) classification was designed to enhance the prediction of ovarian response in In Vitro Fertilization treatment. But after ten years, what is the current clinical utility and future potential of the POSEIDON classification for women in assisted reproductive technology? MAIN BODY: A SOAR (Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, Results) analysis was conducted based on a literature review of studies published from 2016 to 2024 using the POSEIDON framework. Relevant articles were selected from an initial PubMed search, further refined with clinical filters and manual inclusion of key publications. A total of 29 articles were selected and analyzed using the SOAR strategic model to assess the classification’s strengths, limitations, potential clinical applications, and future prospects. The POSEIDON classification is now widely adopted internationally and enhances the stratification and comparability of women with low Assisted Reproductive Technology prognosis. It standardizes research cohorts beyond prior inconsistent definitions. Limitations include rigid cut-offs for age and ovarian markers, which may not reflect individual variability, and the grouping heterogeneity, as ~ 40% of patients with an initial poor response improve with adjusted stimulation. Evidence supporting tailored treatment across POSEIDON groups remains limited. Further prospective validation and subgroup refinement are warranted before routine clinical implementation.
conclusionsPOSEIDON has made significant contributions to research standardization in low-prognosis assisted reproductive ART patients. However, translating it into daily clinical practice will require clarification of prognostic categories, individualized therapeutic implications, and integration of subgroups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.